Transcript Highlights:

• agencies and stakeholders, and the original bill had a 30-day timeline, but it was extended with a justification
• was extended a 30-day timeline, but it was extended with<00:39:16.960> a<00:39:17.200> justification
• <00:39:19.200> So, with a justification to 60 days. So, with a justification to 60 days.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then established a quorum, excused absent members, and approved the journal from Friday, February 20, 2026. The chamber also announced caucus meetings during recess and received notice that the House had passed House Bills 111, 527, and 555. New Senate bills were introduced, including SB 220 on small farm wineries, SB 221 on abuse of a corpse, and SB 222 on environmental covenants and an emergency declaration. The main floor debate centered on Senate Bill 52, which concerns fair permitting and licensing practices. The sponsor described the bill as a response to delays and subjectivity in agency permitting, saying it would require clear standards, set deadlines, and provide meaningful appeals without eliminating existing requirements. Opponents argued that a fixed deadline could be too short for complex environmental and public-safety reviews and could pressure agencies with limited staffing; one senator also warned it could benefit large businesses at the expense of workers and communities. Supporters countered that the bill would improve accountability and help businesses, child care providers, and other applicants get timely decisions. After floor amendments were withdrawn, SB 52 passed as amended by a vote of 30 yeas to 5 nays. Before that vote, the Senate also returned SB 50 from the Appropriations and Revenue Committee to the Rules Committee under suspension of the rules. After SB 52, the chamber took up Senate Bill 124, relating to sick leave for school district personnel, and heard the sponsor’s explanation that it was intended to address classroom absences in a cost-effective way that would benefit students and taxpayers. The transcript cuts off during the discussion of SB 124, before any final vote on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• were told grants, cooperative agreements, you know, were suspended till further notice, pending justification
• And so, uh pending pending uh justification<00:04:54.080> and<00:04:54.400> review.
• <00:04:55.360> Um<00:04:56.320> and<00:04:56.560> that justification and review
• Um and that justification and review.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Minnesota Department of Agriculture presented an overview of its budget, staffing, and major program areas, including protection services, marketing, and administration. Commissioners also highlighted concerns about federal funding uncertainty after a January letter suspending active and future USDA awards to the department. They said the issue affected about 13% of the agency’s budget, created confusion for farmers, and briefly disrupted poultry lab testing and HPAI-related work, though they later received assurances from USDA leadership that existing programs would continue processing. The department also described its anti-fraud efforts, including internal controls, a compliance coordinator, a grants administrator, review committees, site visits, and participation in the state’s Inspector General Coordinating Council. The committee then discussed several agriculture support programs. For dairy margin coverage, the department said Minnesota’s sign-up is open and supported a bill to extend assistance to farmers who began operations in 2023-2025 and were not covered under the earlier production-based formula. The renamed Farm to Food Security program, formerly LFPA, was described as a state-created local food purchasing effort funded at $700,000 per year. The down payment assistance grant for first-time farm buyers was also reviewed; the department said it has supported 112 farmers so far, with additional awards pending, but noted timing problems when purchase agreements fall through. Members asked whether priority should be given to applicants with signed purchase agreements, and the department said that was under consideration. The grain indemnity account update focused on the Hansen-Mueller facility failure and related claims. The department said the account holds about $10.7 million, has received 19 claims totaling $1.1 million, and that $842,000 of those claims were tied specifically to Minnesota transactions. It explained the difference by noting that some claims involved Minnesota farmers selling in North Dakota and Wisconsin, and that the indemnity account covers grains sold in Minnesota. The committee also heard updates on elk and wolf depredation payments, with the department projecting shortfalls in both funds and noting that payments are being delayed into later months. The agriculture response fund balance was said to be about $2.5 million. Finally, the Rural Finance Authority and the East Grand Forks potato facility were discussed. The RFA reported strong demand for low-interest loans, about $26 million remaining from the prior $50 million authorization, and a new $50 million bonding request in the governor’s proposal to avoid a funding gap. The department said the program has issued 3,951 loans totaling about $390.3 million with very low defaults. It also requested $1.38 million in bonding for building improvements at the East Grand Forks potato facility, which it said is the department’s only owned building and supports a significant potato industry. In response to a question from Rep. Bang, the commissioner said recent ICE activity had affected farms, processing plants, immigrant workers, and some rural food businesses, and that the department had relayed those concerns to the governor’s office and congressional delegation.

Transcript Highlights:

• treats abortion medications differently than any other medication without a clear public health justification
• clear any other medication without a clear public<00:12:37.040> health<00:12:37.519> justification
• <00:12:38.639> Mahalo<00:12:39.279> for public health justification.
• Mahalo for public health justification.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The HHS committee met in Room 224 and announced the hearing was being streamed live, with a one-minute limit on testimony. The chair explained that written testimony had already been reviewed and that speakers should either add new comments or stand on their written testimony. The committee first heard SB 2211, an emergency appropriation to the Department of Human Services. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support, including DHS, Aloha United Way, the Hawaii Food Industry Association, the Hawaii Public Health Institute, Catholic Charities, and many individuals. Supporters emphasized the importance of maintaining SNAP-related food assistance and emergency food delivery, while Catholic Charities raised a question about whether the bill’s language would also reach food banks serving food-insecure households that are not on SNAP. No opposition was heard and the bill was moved on without questions from members. The committee then heard SB 2025, which would exempt actively practicing advanced practice registered nurses from jury duty. Testimony was broadly supportive from nursing and health organizations, including the Hawaii American Nurses Association, the Hawaii affiliate of the College of Nurse Midwives, the Hawaii State Board of Nursing, and others. One witness from Kaiser Permanente requested an amendment to include physician assistants, and a committee member asked the Board of Nursing to review that request. The bill otherwise drew no opposition and no further member questions. SB 2038, relating to medication labeling, drew the most extended discussion. The measure would change labeling requirements for certain abortion medications, and testimony was split between supporters who framed it as a privacy and access issue and opponents who raised patient safety, ethics, and transparency concerns. The Department of Health supported the intent but requested an amendment to allow quicker access to private information during investigations without a subpoena. The Board of Pharmacy said it supported the written comments but noted operational challenges and possible cost impacts, while Kaiser said compliance would likely require manual workarounds and could slow pharmacy processes. The chair and members questioned whether patients could simply remove labels themselves, but witnesses said there could still be safety and access issues if the patient is not the one receiving the prescription. The committee then moved on to SB 2050, relating to chiropractic, which received support from the Hawaii Board of Chiropractic and the Hawaii State Chiropractic Association, with no substantive opposition noted. The hearing later turned to SB 201, relating to insurance, which appeared to be a new mandated-benefit measure tied to infertility/IVF coverage. The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission provided comments, while Hawaii Family Forum opposed the bill, arguing it went beyond medical infertility and raised ethical and public policy concerns. Kaiser and the Hawaii Association of Health Plans both asked for a study or audit, saying the measure could create new insurance mandates and increase costs for residents and employers. Private Work Hawaii strongly supported the bill as an equity issue. The committee noted there was no quorum for decision-making and deferred action on the measure to a later hearing, then recessed.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's kind of the justification for us keeping the discussion moving on that.
• > of<01:40:53.520> the report so that's kind of the report so that's kind of the justification
• 54.679> us<01:40:55.280> uh<01:40:55.400> keeping<01:40:55.719> the justification
• for us uh keeping the justification for us uh keeping the discussion<01:40:56.400> moving<01:

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The justification just says the increased costs for that.
• Yes, and they provided a sort of justification for what they were looking to purchase. Good.

Summary: The committee heard a series of appropriation requests and contract reviews across multiple sections. In Section B, members approved temporary appropriations for the Court of Appeals, Commerce/Aeronautics, and Insurance-related payments and refunds. Section C ARPA requests from DHS were approved to return unused federal funds. Section D infrastructure-related appropriations, including wildfire preparedness, broadband BEAD funding, forestry support, recycling, and oil and gas sample preservation, were approved after questions about broadband audit controls and performance safeguards. Section E DHS reallocations were approved, including large transfers within Medical Services from hospital medical to private and public nursing home lines, along with smaller transfers for children and family services, developmental disabilities, and youth services; members asked about the source and purpose of the medical services transfer. Sections F and G were reviewed, covering cash fund requests, federal grants, and miscellaneous grants, including community college storm repairs, corrections commissary and maintenance, 911 enhancements, maternal health, disability determinations, state police equipment, digital newspaper archiving, and CDL data improvements. In Section H, the committee reviewed pay plan appropriations and performance fund transfers tied to the new Class and Comp pay plan. Section I reviewed three methods of finance for UA Little Rock, UAMS, and the University of Arkansas system. In Section J, the committee reviewed discretionary grants, including a $1.4 million HIV services grant and nine tobacco prevention subgrants through UAPB. Members questioned the effectiveness, metrics, and addresses of some tobacco-cessation arts-based grantees, especially Arts Absolutely Inc.; after discussion, Representative Kavanaugh moved to expunge the vote on J2 and refer it back for review at a later ALC meeting, and that motion passed. J3, a Department of Energy and Environment grant for propane safety training and e-waste recycling services, was then reviewed. The committee also reviewed contracts in Section K. K-1 ratified emergency management nuclear planning work performed during a transition between agencies. K-2 construction contracts included architectural and engineering services for corrections, National Park College signage, a Razorback Road parking facility, and UAMS cyclotron installation. K-3 intergovernmental contracts covered health, education, autism waiver, stroke, newborn screening, Medicaid evidence review, and radiation testing services. K-4 out-of-state contracts included staffing, IT, tobacco prevention, audit, marketing, planetarium, recruitment, and janitorial services; Senator Irvin noted one contract appeared to belong in the out-of-state list rather than intergovernmental. K-5 in-state contracts covered staffing, cleaning, re-entry and treatment services, foster care and disability services, hearing officers, asbestos abatement, campus IT support, and janitorial work. The meeting ended after a brief personal update from Senator Irvin about tornado damage in Stone County and thanks to members for their concern, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• surprised to learn how few options our insurance commissioner has when it comes to analyzing that justification
• I think that we would be able to see that in rate change justification.

Bills: SB1969, SB1953, SB1277, SB1287, SB1061, SB1916, SB1589, SB2178, SB1444, SB1438, SB1501, SB1873, SB1364

Keywords: massage therapy, licensing, multistate compact, regulation, healthcare, professionals, Employer Health Plan Transparency Act, health insurance, claims data, contract provisions, health care providers, auditable materials, HIPAA compliance, insurance regulation, unemployment benefits, employment security, work search, job search, reemployment, jobless benefits

Transcript Highlights:

• never wanted to make any improvements because if they made improvements, they may not have the justification
• More often than not, we see it along the lines of under the current statute, you have to show justification

Bills: SB32, SB464, SB996, SB1163, SB1173, SB1277, SB1452, SB1453, SB1548, SB1882, SB1883, SB2016, SB 32

Keywords: ad valorem taxation, tax exemption, franchise tax credit, income production, personal property, SB 464, school buffer zone, tobacco retailer, vape shop, e-cigarette, vaping, nicotine, tobacco products, retail permit, comptroller, Class A misdemeanor, school proximity, youth access, public school, private school

Transcript Highlights:

• never wanted to make any improvements because if they made improvements they may not have the justification
• More than not, we see it along the lines of under the statute current statute, you have to show justification

Bills: SB 32, SB 464, SB 996, SB 1163, SB 1173, SB 1277, SB 1452, SB 1453, SB 1548, SB 1882, SB 1883, SB 2016

Keywords: ad valorem taxation, tax exemption, franchise tax credit, income production, personal property, SB 464, school buffer zone, tobacco retailer, vape shop, e-cigarette, vaping, nicotine, tobacco products, retail permit, comptroller, Class A misdemeanor, school proximity, youth access, public school, private school

Transcript Highlights:

• That is, uh, I appreciate that question, and I think that gets to the core of the justification for statewide
• That is, uh, I appreciate that question, and I think that gets to the core of the justification for statewide
• the core and I I think that gets to the the core of<00:36:25.359> the<00:36:25.599> justification
• <00:36:26.320> for<00:36:26.640> statewide of the justification for statewide of the
• justification for statewide intervention<00:36:28.000> rather<00:36:28.320> than<00:36

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:05 Roll Call 00:00:12 Discussion of Legislative Measures 00:03:12 Discussion of Housing and Land Use 00:21:58 Discussion of Short Term Rental Policies 01:03:17 Adjournment 01:15:38, 958, all

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from its June 4, 2025 meeting and then heard a series of presentations focused largely on housing and land-use policy. Senator Robbie Mills and Representative Josh Bray discussed two 2025 housing measures: Senate Bill 50, which would create residential infrastructure development districts to help local governments finance infrastructure for new housing developments through special assessments and local debt, and House Bill 7, which would let local governments identify development areas and rebate new property tax revenue to developers as an incentive for housing growth. They said Kentucky faces a statewide housing shortage of roughly 210,000 units, projected to grow if building patterns do not change, and argued that regulatory relief and financing tools are needed to increase supply. Representative Rebecca Rymer presented House Bill 371, which would require local permitting when an industry’s residual waste landfill is located in a different county from the industry itself. She said current law lets such landfills bypass local review, leaving host counties with no say despite road impacts and other local burdens. She said the bill would preserve the existing exemption when the landfill and industry are co-located, and noted support from KLC and KO. Representative Steve Doan also described House Bill 806, a statewide backyard chicken bill that would allow domesticated hens, prohibit roosters, set a minimum of six hens that local governments could not go below, and preserve local authority over setbacks, sanitation, maintenance standards, and egg sales. He said it would override outright local bans but not HOA restrictions, and cited a current Northern Kentucky dispute and ADA litigation as reasons for the proposal. The committee then heard a broader discussion on housing and land use from Charlie Gardner of the Mercatus Center and Nolan Gray of California YIMBY and the Bluegrass Institute. They outlined categories of land-use regulation, described the recent growth of state-level housing reforms nationwide, and cited examples such as ADU legalization, smaller lot sizes, reduced parking minimums, streamlined permitting, and single-stair or other building-code reforms. They argued that housing shortages are a statewide concern, that localities often have incentives to block growth, and that state intervention can reduce costs and uncertainty without compromising health and safety. Members asked about the housing shortage estimate, the effect of red tape on safety and local authority, and how state reforms could be phased in; the presenters said reforms often include lead time, can be targeted to larger jurisdictions, and should focus on reducing time and cost while maintaining basic standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• So in answer to your question, a city better have a justification for the exaction before it imposes
• unnecessary hassle, but nevertheless, fundamentally a city already has to prove up, has to have justification
• They don't have a justification. It's a road to a dead end. There really is.

Bills: SB1254, SB1431, SB1478, SB1566, SB1787

Keywords: workers' compensation, industrial commission, safety regulations, employee protection, penalties, compliance, municipal planning, homeowners associations, design regulations, property rights, building permits, single-family homes, liquor, alcohol, spirituous liquor, liquor license, liquor licensing, Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, restaurant to-go cocktails, mixed cocktails

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 1566, which would prohibit municipalities and counties from maliciously delaying licensing, permits, or approvals, authorize the Attorney General to enforce the prohibition, and provide expedited judicial review. The sponsor said the bill is intended to address affordability by preventing intentional government delays in housing and business approvals. County representatives supported the goal but opposed the bill as drafted, arguing the county language differed from the city/town language and could sweep in ordinary processing delays or incomplete applications; the sponsor said a floor amendment would fix the county language. Testimony from supporters described long permit and parcel-number delays and argued the bill would give applicants a remedy against intentional obstruction. The committee recommended the bill do pass by a 7-3 vote, with one present and one absent. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1787, which would require written notice for exactions imposed on development projects, allow individualized determinations, and create an appeal path including judicial review. The sponsor framed it as a takings and affordability measure to stop unrelated or excessive exactions from being imposed on housing projects. Cities and counties opposed the bill, saying existing law already requires nexus and proportionality, already provides an appeal process, and that the bill would create a duplicative Attorney General review and confusion, especially for mixed-use projects. Supporters, including Pacific Legal Foundation, the Home Builders Association, and a homeowner who described a costly infrastructure demand on her property, argued the bill would curb extortionate demands and make the process fairer. The committee passed the bill 7-2 with one present and one absent. Senate Bill 1478, a liquor-regulation cleanup bill, was also heard and received broad support. The measure makes technical changes to liquor statutes, including clarifying interim permits, repealing a federal food-safety preemption provision, and updating definitions such as cider and production terminology. Industry stakeholders said the bill was the product of months of consensus work and mostly technical corrections. It passed unanimously, 10-0. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 1431, which would limit municipal control over home design features and prohibit certain required shared amenities that would necessitate HOA maintenance. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill would reduce housing costs by preventing subjective aesthetic mandates and unnecessary HOA-driven requirements, while opponents from cities and neighborhood groups warned it would undermine local control, crime-prevention design standards, neighborhood character, and quality. Home builders and property-rights advocates said the bill would expand consumer choice and reduce costs, while critics argued it could lead to lower-quality housing and remove local recourse. The bill was not reported out in the portion provided, and testimony continued with no final vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• time, are voter roll purges that disproportionately target voters of color without sufficient justification
• are voter role purges, right, that disproportionately target voters of color without sufficient justification
• you know, disproportionate targeting in the removal of voters from the rolls without sufficient justification

Summary: The committee held a work session on voting rights in the United States and Washington, beginning with testimony from Marissa Wright of Campaign Legal Center and David Montes of the ACLU of Washington. They described the federal Voting Rights Act’s main protections—preclearance, vote suppression, and vote dilution—and argued that Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich have weakened those tools. They said Washington should consider stronger state-level protections, including a preclearance program and broader safeguards against discriminatory voting practices. Members asked about Washington’s history of discrimination, voter roll purges, noncitizen registration, and remedies under the Washington Voting Rights Act, including ranked-choice voting and district-based systems. The committee then heard from the Office of Equity and several commissions, which described their roles in advising state government and working with communities. They focused on the immigration sub-cabinet created under Executive Order 2509, saying it is intended to improve coordination across agencies, the legislature, the courts, and community organizations on issues such as data privacy, language access, health care, education, and accountability under the Keep Washington Working Act. Members asked about the use of NGOs, accountability for KWW violations, and the sub-cabinet’s goals, and the panel said the effort is meant to help government respond more quickly and collaboratively while centering immigrant, disability, LGBTQ, and other communities. The final panel was from the University of Washington Elections Database Project, which presented data on vote-by-mail ballot challenges, cures, and rejections from 2020 to 2024. They reported that about 1.5% of ballots are signature-challenged in most elections, roughly 60% of challenged ballots are cured, and overall rejection rates are about 1% in general elections and 1.5% in primaries. The researchers said voters of color, younger voters, and some tribal-area voters experience higher rejection rates, and that differences appear tied to signature mismatch, language access, ballot timing, and familiarity with the system. In the last panel, Maria Fernandez and Vicki Frausto of EIA described voter education and civic engagement work in Yakima County and Sunnyside, including concerns about intimidation, language barriers, signature mismatch, and at-large election systems; they said stronger Washington Voting Rights Act protections would help communities elect candidates of choice. No votes were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, that seemed to have justification for us.
• members, that, yeah, we can just meet that deadline, we don't have to offer anything significant justification
• Justification we wish we would be getting, and we're scratching our heads.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• respectfully request that the committee entertain a possible amendment to the bill, and I'll provide a justification
• respectfully request that the committee entertain a possible amendment to the bill, and I'll provide a justification
• respectfully request that the committee entertain a possible amendment to the bill, and I'll provide a justification
• respectfully request that the committee entertain a possible amendment to the bill, and I'll provide a justification
• respectfully request that the committee entertain a possible amendment to the bill, and I'll provide a justification

Bills: SF0102, SF0123, SF0021, SF0099

Keywords: energy transmission, load growth, Wyoming energy authority, transmission planning study, public utilities, regional cooperation, energy, funding, grants, loans, coal, natural gas, mineral processing, economic development, stable token, liquidity, trust account, Wyoming, fund distribution, financial regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• We have not received any further details yet and frankly feel there was no need or valid justification
• frankly feel there was no need or uh frankly feel there was no need or valid<00:35:12.640> justification
• <00:35:13.520> for<00:35:13.760> these<00:35:14.079> targeted valid justification
• for these targeted valid justification for these targeted cuts<00:35:15.119> that<00:35:15.440
• by the federal termination justification by the federal government<00:37:13.040> and<00:37:13.280

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, there were several justifications way back when.
• Now, there were several justifications way back when.
• Now, there were several justifications way back when.
• Now, there were several justifications way back when.
• Now, there were several justifications way back when.

Bills: HF1027, HF2226, HF1916, HF1915, HF1567, HF1986

Keywords: mortgage foreclosure, redemption, foreclosure surplus, sheriff's sale, junior lienholder, mortgagor, homeowner protections, loss mitigation, dual tracking, foreclosure redemption period, certificate of redemption, certificate of sale, sheriff, county recorder, registrar of titles, homeownership center, lien priority, real property, foreclosure by advertisement, surplus funds

Transcript Highlights:

• The justification just says the increased costs for that.
• And they provided a sort of justification for what they were looking to purchase. Good. All right.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no true justification presented to the public, which leads me to believe that they are not looking
• Since 1998, there's no justification for undoing decades of successful policy, leaving the current law

Bills: HB4, HB54, HB775, HB850, HB 1122, HB 1249, HB1405, HB2336, HB2757, HB3372, HB3622, HB4442, HB4687, HB4893, HB5089, HB5515, HB5606, SB10, SB24, HB1573, HB3369, HB4, HB54, SB 10, SB 24

Keywords: non-human behaviors, education, Texas schools, policy, regulation, funding, teacher salaries, school districts, state budget, non-enrolled students, University Interscholastic League, participation, eligibility standards, school participation, academic standards, Texas education, interscholastic league, extracurricular activities, academic proficiency, AED

Transcript Highlights:

• In terms of if we're asking for an interest rate increase, we need to consider why and what the justification
• We would love to see it because we are very open, but as it stands, we're not seeing that justification

Bills: HB886, HB1514, HB2434, HB2688, HB2802, HB3161, HB3221, HB4029, HB4339, HB4591, HB4774, HB4802, HB4853, HB5627, SB1737

Keywords: retirement, supplemental payment, benefits, Employees Retirement System, eligible annuitants, legislation, annuity, service credit, Employees Retirement System of Texas, employee benefits, pension reform, public retirement systems, municipality pensions, firefighters, police officers, retirement age, DROP program, actuarial studies, pension benefits, municipal retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• executive branch's mentioned the high level of aid that goes out to cities and counties is kind of a justification
• executive branch's mentioned the high level of aid that goes out to cities and counties is kind of a justification
• executive branch's mentioned the high level of aid that goes out to cities and counties is kind of a justification
• executive branch's mentioned the high level of aid that goes out to cities and counties is kind of a justification
• executive branch's mentioned the high level of aid that goes out to cities and counties is kind of a justification

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And the justification to consider the amendments for not having the changes in the laws at this point
• And the justification to consider the amendments for not having the changes in the laws at this point
• And the justification to consider the amendments for not having the changes in the laws at this point
• And the justification to consider the amendments for not having the changes in the laws at this point
• justification to consider the amendments justification to consider the amendments for<01:21:43.400>

Bills: SB3253, SB2401, SB3169, SB17, SB3014, SB3032, SB1432, SB2002, SB2972, SB3247

Keywords: conservation, endangered species, wildlife preservation, native birds, biodiversity, sanctuary, nonprofit, DLNR, agricultural district, land use, chapter 195D, chapter 205, chapter 42F, state funding, public purpose, habitat restoration, predator-free sanctuary, ecosystem restoration, Zealandia, wildlife refuge

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on SB 5253 SD2 relating to conservation and SB 2401 relating to regional shoreline mitigation district, with the chair emphasizing short testimony limits and the need to finish before session. On SB 5253, DLNR said it stood on its written testimony and answered questions about the bill’s proposed nonprofit endangered species sanctuary. Members asked whether existing entities or agreements, such as land trusts, private landowners, and DLNR safe harbor agreements, could accomplish similar conservation goals without creating a new entity. DLNR said similar work already exists, but it was not aware of a comparable sanctuary model in the state. A member also questioned language suggesting for-profit businesses in the sanctuary, and DLNR said the intent appeared to be sales of outreach or similar materials, though it agreed that such activities could be handled by a nonprofit. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 2401, which would create a regional shoreline adaptation/mitigation framework. The Department of the Attorney General said it had concerns about inconsistent use of the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation,” warning of possible title-subject issues. DLNR said it was neutral on the terminology and more concerned with the substance, and noted that the bill would not waive permits; any plan would still require environmental review and applicable state and county permits. DLNR also supported OHA’s recommendation to consider impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during regional planning, and said the bill’s language on temporary shoreline protection measures could help address the gap between emergency permits and longer-term planning while avoiding a hardening-only approach. The Office of Planning supported the regional planning concept but noted it is not a regulatory agency and would need to work with DLNR and the Land Board. OHA supported the bill’s planning-based approach but recommended amendments to require assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during plan development and to clarify that environmental review would still apply at the project level. Testifiers from the Ka‘anapali Steering Committee strongly supported the bill, saying it would provide a regional framework for ongoing erosion problems while preserving full regulatory authority and normal permitting, and they proposed amendments to standardize terminology, create a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection, and address ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Members discussed the meaning of “mitigation” versus “adaptation,” the scope of shoreline hardening, and whether the bill would help the legislature take a broader, more holistic view of shoreline decisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.